I think this is overstating the problem by comparing unique bundles of policy opinions, rather than looking at agreements on a per-policy basis. Out of 27 polic

I think this is overstating the problem by comparing unique bundles of policy opinions, rather than looking at agreements on a per-policy basis. Out of 27 policies in the game, 20 policies had overwhelming support (>70% agreement) one way or another [1]; those are obvious candidates for moderation rules. And of the seven controversial policies, there was still >60% agreement on five. There's certainly room to disagree on the controversial policies, but I think painting this as meaning there's less than 10% agreement overall, or that moderation is impossible, isn't really accurate. Most people agreed on most things. After all, we live in a society where we have ambiguous rules like these all over the place. Occasionally someone will get a weird-seeming enforcement action, or a weird-seeming lack of enforcement (compared to what the rules say — for example, while it might seem weird that SF does not punish thieves for under $900 of stolen goods from a common sense perspective, it isn't weird from a letter of the law perspective: that's the actual law); but in my opinion that's fairly rare per-capita. But maybe I'm biased since I had 100% agreement per-policy with the majority ;) 1: https://postimg.cc/SjMbNMKW https://postimg.cc/SjMbNMKW